There will be no denying the fact that the United States has secured a victory in war on terrorism as they have successfully eliminated the symbol of terrorism. The killing of Osama bin Laden at Abbottabad is really a big victory for the United States. But the Osama's killing at a Pakistani garrison city has exposed the double standards of rulers of Pakistan. Pakistani rulers have used the war on terror for earning dollars. They have killed thousands of people in their own country without any reason.

Though rulers of Pakistan have given impression to the world that they have been fighting a war against terrorism, but actually they have slaughtered their own people just for a few dollars. It is ironic to note that Pakistani forces have been carrying out a big army operation against terrorists in tribal areas, but so far no known terrorist has been killed. Terrorists have been roaming freely in tribal areas. Pakistani rulers have also staged dramas in Swat and some other parts of the country just for stealing the US dollars. The US administration has also kept their eyes closed on the brutalities of Pakistani rulers.

Now this will be really test for the Obama administration as now how can they deal the situation after the elimination of symbol of terrorism. Actually Osama bin Laden was just a symbol. This is true a part of Pakistani establishment has still been providing support to terrorists. Actually they want that there must a full-pledge war between the US and Pakistan. This is the aim of Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda wants to keep the US engaged in war so in this way they will destroy the US economy. Now this will really be a test case for the Obama administration. But one thing is clear that Pakistani rulers are corrupt and they accept any condition for dollars. But trusting the corrupt Pakistani officials will be a big blunder of the US administration.

In his comment a Pakistani writer Prof Farakh A Khan states that there has been foreign media and American administration uproar against
Pakistan's ISI for allegedly harbouring Osama in Abbottabad, the
stronghold of the army. In Pakistan the response was varied. On the
other hand the civilian government is caught in a vice between the
mighty American "rage', Pakistani public opinion, and the powerful
politicised Pakistan Army. The whole episode of Osama's killing has
caught the Pakistani army in a particularly difficult position since it
has remained the guardian of our "ideology', security, and foreign
policy (mainly anti-India). Was it "connivance or incompetence' on their
part that Osama remained undetected for over five years by the army
intelligence agencies, particularly the ISI? Again, a large American
force was allowed to enter undetected and attack Osama's compound in
Abbottabad with the army napping. Our sovereignty lay in tatters.

- Advertisement -

Unfortunately,
the media and the people in parliament missed the crucial point in the
whole affair of Osama's killing. First and foremost, we should admit
that this was Pakistan's institutional (both military and civilian)
failure. This episode should not be limited to only a power struggle
between the army and the civilians. We have faced institutional failures
since the inception of Pakistan and each successive government made it
worse. We now have a legion of failed institutions and we repeat the
same mistake with each new government. We need reforms in the army and
civilian organisations to transform them into functioning institutions.
Unfortunately, our present tainted government is only concerned with
self-preservation and is not in a position to execute changes in
governance.

In general the Pakistani population is anti-US,
Israel and India. The general religious beliefs of many are in line with
al Qaeda/Wahabi ideology, though not in a jihadi sense. The murder of
more than 30,000 innocent people of Pakistan in terrorist attacks is
often blamed on the secret agencies of the US, Israel, and India.

In
a local channel's polls regarding Osama's killing, most Pakistanis feel
unhappy over his death. The US is considered as an enemy by 77 percent.
According to the Pew Research Centre survey conducted before Osama's
death, only 11 percent Pakistanis had a favourable view of the US. Most
Pakistanis are not convinced that Osama is dead. Many feel that Osama
was killed many months or years back and his body was brought out from
cold storage and thrown into the sea. All sorts of conspiracy theories
are floating in the public, projecting an anti-American mindset.

- Advertisement -

The
attitude of religious parties and religious groups is different to the
government policy on Osama's killing. They are harping on the breach of
Pakistan's sovereignty and security lapse in detecting the American
attack. Osama has been praised as a hero and declared a martyr. Then
there is also severe anti-American rhetoric for attacking Muslims around
the world. Maulana Abdul Aziz of Laal Mosque in his interview with CNN
(May 16) went a step further when asked what should the US do to avoid
Muslim wrath. He suggested that Obama should become a Muslim and all
problems shall be solved! Osama also wanted to conquer the world through
his jihad.

Jamaat-e-Islami chief Syed Munawar Hassan wants the
government to expel US diplomats along with other Americans from
Pakistan. He wants Pakistan to leave the American camp and shoot down
drones. He again drummed the notion that the US has launched a "crusade'
against Pakistan, which should be countered. These religious-political
parties see India, Israel and the US as the real enemies.

The
JUI-F demanded suspension of NATO supplies immediately as agreed in the
12-point declaration in the joint session of parliament. The JUI-F is
cautious regarding its statements against the American invasion of May
2. It was claimed by the ISI chief in the joint parliamentary session
that the JUI-F was on the payroll of Libya and Saudi Arabia in the past.

What
they and the 12-point in-camera joint parliamentary session resolution
failed to do was to condemn the killing of innocent people around the
world by Osama and his organisation. Instead of point scoring,
politicking, futile parliamentary debates, saving heads or rolling them
and fixing responsibility, we should be focusing on change in our
battered institutions. The army is the first on the list. It seems that
they are not answerable to anyone and are proud to do their own internal
accountability. We have no clue what the army is up to in Balochistan.
We do not know what the army is doing in FATA. It is about time
independent observers were sent to these sensitive spots to ascertain
the real picture. We should have a commission headed by judges to reform
our armed forces and make them more efficient and less expensive. Most
of all, the foreign policy, especially regarding India and Afghanistan,
has to be taken away from the army and they should be made answerable to
parliament. We need to stop the madness in Siachen and the Sir Creek
standoff against India. The Kashmir issue has to be resolved soon. There
are other failed institutions; to name a few: the police,
administration, PIA, Railways, Steel Mill, etc, which need urgent
reforms. We need to end or minimise corruption at the lower and higher
levels. Unless we reform our institutions we cannot tackle the
horrendous problems of poverty, education, health, corruption, power
shortfall and a declining economy. Who shall initiate change and how
this can be done remains an unanswered question.

We had three
unique opportunities in the past (1947 partition, 1971 war and after
1990 when the US left Pakistan "orphaned') to reform ourselves but we
never went in that direction. Today we again have an opportunity to fix
our bombed-out institutions. Personally I feel that we are going to miss
this opportunity as well and continue our "daa' (subterfuge) politics
for personal gains. The present leadership does not have the capacity to
discern the basic issues facing Pakistan nor is competent to change our
course.The End

Muhammad Khurshid, a resident of Bajaur Agency, tribal areas situated on Pak-Afghan border is journalist by profession. He contributes articles and news stories to various online and print newspapers. His subject matter is terrorism. He is also (more...)